zlacker

>>claude+(OP)
I'd totally support the employees if they got fired or even cautioned for exercising their free speech rights. Amazon needs to get penalized if that's the case. Where it gets into the gray zone is when employees misuse company property and time to engage in activism. Like the Google Employee who used her access privileges to distribute messages supporting her position.

Personally I think we should draw a clear line between these two types of actions. When we don't do that, we weaken legitimate free speech.

>>jeswin+fi
You are in confusion, there is no free speech issue; the First Amendment protects the free speech from the government, nothing else.

Just to be very clear: I am in no way agreeing with Amazon, just correcting a confusion about the applicability of the US Constitution and amendments.

>>Adrian+Gi
Like you, I find myself arguing on a 'side' that I disagree with. I don't agree with the parent you replied to, but they would not be wrong to speak of a right to free speech detached from the US constitution. Maybe they should pre-emptively clarify this, but the notion of a moral right to freedom of speech is different from the legal protections afforded by one country's constitution.

In other words, you are wrong to say "there is no free speech issue; the First Amendment protects the free speech from the government, nothing else". You would be right if you inserted "constitutional" or "legal" before "free speech issue".

The real substance of the issue is found in 'what kind of repercussions do you see as acceptable for exercising free speech', to which there are, in my opinion, many valid answers.